Bill aimed at stopping sharia law passes Senate

Andy Marso

Friday

May 11, 2012 at 12:40 PM

The Senate passed a bill dubbed "American law for American courts" Friday that would prevent any court in the state from making a ruling based on foreign or religious laws that run counter to the U.S. or Kansas Constitutions.

The measure was spearheaded by Rep. Peggy Mast, R-Emporia, who, along with Rep. Jan Pauls, D-Hutchinson, has spoken publicly about the need to protect Kansans from Islamic law, or sharia.

"I feel like this is going to help women know the rights they have in America," Mast said Friday. "When the word gets out, women will come into courts in Kansas and the U.S. and seek equal protection."

The bill, House substitute for Senate bill 79, passed 33-4. It already had passed the House and will now go to the governor. In the Senate it touched off a lengthy debate that included the danger of sharia creeping into Kansas.

Several supporters noted that the law doesn’t address any specific religion, including Islam, and said it is merely intended to further protect rights already granted under the state and federal constitutions.

But Sen. Chris Steineger, R-Kansas City, said a marketing campaign by supporters of the bill inundated him with materials that "explain why sharia law is coming and Muslims are trying to take over America."

"I thought that was quite ludicrous at the time, and I still do," Steineger said. "I pointed this out, because this was not presented as protecting the Kansas Constitution. The proponents of this measure, clearly by the literature they gave me and by the video link they directed me to, they presented this as protecting us against sharia law. Despite the fact that this doesn't mention sharia, that's how this whole issue was presented."

Steineger, formerly a Democrat, said conservatives shouldn't lose focus on the fiscal stances on which most of the country agrees with them.

He also connected the motivations for the bill to an incident earlier in the session when he helped bring a Turkish trade delegation to the Capitol.

"Somebody stood outside the House chamber and protested that this was the first step toward sharia law," Steineger said, growing animated. "That's an embarrassment to the Legislature and an embarrassment to our governor."

But Sen. Jeff King, R-Independence, a lawyer and one of the members of a conference committee that reviewed the bill, said that although the issue had become "highly politicized," he tried to look at it as devoid of politics and the Islam-related emails that flooded his inbox and simply focus on its language.

"Nowhere in this bill is sharia law mentioned," King said. "Nowhere in this bill is any foreign law mentioned. This bill is the opposite of intolerance."

King said the bill could help citizens by preventing Kansas courts from enforcing judgments against them for prosecutions that occur under the laws of countries that have lesser free-speech protections than the U.S. He also crafted an amendment to exempt foreign business contracts, addressing fears that the bill could drive companies from Kansas.

But some of the bill's supporters used the discussion as an opportunity to voice their opposition to Muslim law.

"To me, this is a women’s rights issue," said Sen. Susan Wagle, R-Wichita. "They stone women to death in countries that have sharia law. They have no rights in court. Female children are treated brutally."

Sen. Jean Schodorf, R-Wichita, said she had confirmed that criminal actions, such as stoning, are prosecuted in Kansas regardless of the offender's religion, even without the bill.

Sen. John Vratil, R-Leawood, said he quizzed the bill's supporters on when a Kansas court had ever based a decision on sharia law and had yet to be provided with an example.

"Ladies and gentleman, this is a solution in search of a problem," Vratil said.

Wagle cited a divorce in Wichita that was highlighted by Mast earlier in the week in which the husband has entered a Muslim marriage gift, or Sadaq, as evidence in the financial negotiations. That case, which began in 2010, is still pending. The court-appointed guardian ad litem said earlier this week that religion hasn’t been a factor in deciding custody of the couple's child.

"The case in Wichita has not been decided yet," Sen. Tim Owens, R-Overland Park "I would suggest we wait and see, because my prediction is they're going to side with the American view of how that dissolution should happen."

Never miss a story

Choose the plan that's right for you.
Digital access or digital and print delivery.